[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20220120142539.6d1fac12@canb.auug.org.au>
Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2022 14:25:39 +1100
From: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
To: Marc Zyngier <maz@...nel.org>
Cc: Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@...nel.org>,
Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
Joey Gouly <joey.gouly@....com>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: linux-next: build warning after merge of the pinctrl tree
Hi all,
On Thu, 28 Oct 2021 08:03:31 +0100 Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@...nel.org> wrote:
>
> Em Wed, 27 Oct 2021 12:10:45 +0100
> Marc Zyngier <maz@...nel.org> escreveu:
>
> > On Wed, 27 Oct 2021 12:01:18 +0100, Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au> wrote:
> > >
> > > After merging the pinctrl tree, today's linux-next build (htmldocs)
> > > produced this warning:
> > >
> > > include/linux/gpio/driver.h:284: warning: Function parameter or member 'parent_handler_data_array' not described in 'gpio_irq_chip'
> > >
> > > Introduced by commit
> > >
> > > cfe6807d82e9 ("gpio: Allow per-parent interrupt data")
> > >
> > > But may actually be a problem with the tool :-(
> >
> > I guess the tool doesn't like having two fields that are part of a
> > union documented together... Happy to tweak it if someone tells me how
> > this should be written.
>
> Yes, that's the case. See, when you do:
>
> /**
> * @parent_handler_data:
> * @parent_handler_data_array:
> *
> * Data associated, and passed to, the handler for the parent
> * interrupt. Can either be a single pointer if @per_parent_data
> * is false, or an array of @num_parents pointers otherwise. If
> * @per_parent_data is true, @parent_handler_data_array cannot be
> * NULL.
> */
> union {
> void *parent_handler_data;
> void **parent_handler_data_array;
> };
>
> The tool will understand it as an undocumented "parent_handler_data" and
> a documented "parent_handler_data_array".
>
> It has to do that, as otherwise it won't get cases where people just adds a
> @foo: as a template but actually forgets to fill it.
>
> The solution would be to add a description for both, e. g. something
> similar to:
>
> /**
> * @parent_handler_data:
> *
> * If @per_parent_data is false, contains a single pointer
> * with the data associated, and passed to, the handler for the
> * parent interrupt.
> *
> * @parent_handler_data_array:
> *
> * If @per_parent_data is true, it should contain an array of
> * @num_parents pointers with the data associated, and passed to,
> * the handler for the parent interrupt. Cannot be NULL.
> */
I am still getting this warning.
--
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell
Content of type "application/pgp-signature" skipped
Powered by blists - more mailing lists